About UCLA Anderson Global Supply Chain Blog
This blog is developed by the Decisions Operations and Technology Management (DOTM) Faculty at the UCLA Anderson School as well as special guests. It is intended to report, analyze, and comment on events that relate to current Global Supply Chain Management issues. Each blog is presented in English, (Simplified) Chinese, and (Castilian) Spanish, and it can take one of the following formats:
(a) An Interview -- the author formulates questions about a current issue, and the interviewee provides commentary.
(b) An insight -- the author provides insights concerning global supply chains, including current events.
(c) An analytical piece -- the author analyzes a particular supply chain issue and formulates descriptive and/or prescriptive views.
For more information on the blog contributors, check the DOTM website.

Contact

English

08/08/2016

In June 2016, the Panama Canal will double its capacity, and this capacity expansion will undoubtedly reshape the freight flows around the globe, including those transiting through the Port of Los Angeles (click here for a past blog related to this subject).

Considered jointly, the Port of Los Angeles and the Port of Long Beach are the 9th largest port in the world, handling most goods transiting between China and the United States. Given the various limitations of the Panama Canal (tolls, congestion, ship tonnage limitation), most goods that need to be delivered from East Asia to the United States are currently unloaded in the Port of Los Angeles and shipped by train to their final destination. Overall, the port activities in Los Angeles is a major activity node in Southern California, employing about 900,000 people throughout the LA County Region and 3.6 million worldwide.

However, the capacity expansion of the Panama Canal may change this shipment pattern. The Panama Canal currently handles about 340 million tons per year, which corresponds to about 14,000 transits per year. This is quite remarkable given that it was originally designed to accommodate 80 million tons per year! The increase of capacity relative to the original design has been achieved through a succession of minor tweaks, such as improvement in the scheduling algorithm, widening of some key bottlenecks, and deepening of some critical channels. Yet, there are only so many ways one can stretch capacity without major investment, and a few years ago, the Panama Canal has undertaken a $5.25 billion capacity expansion effort, which will conclude in June 2016, increasing the total capacity to 510 million tons, i.e., a 50% increase in total capacity, allowing for both larger ships to transit through the canal and increasing total traffic.

This increase in bottleneck capacity will undoubtedly reshape the freight flows between Asia and North America. In particular, it is very much conceivable that, if some ports on the East Coast (such as Miami) develop their logistical infrastructure, it may become more efficient in the long run to ship goods from Asia to the East Coast through the Panama Canal, creating a threat to both the Port of Los Angeles and the railway that currently ship these goods.

How can the Port of Los Angeles respond to this threat? I recommend they follow a three-pronged approach, aimed at improving:

Flexibility, by invest in capability to accommodate both small and large vessels (such as the enormous Ben Franklin ships, which can carry up to 18,000 containers);

Responsiveness, by investing in capacity to alleviate congestion and by streamlining the intermodal transition between ship and trucks or trains;

Reliability, by working with the unions to reduce the likelihood of major strikes (such as the strike that occurred in 2015) that could disrupt just-in-time supply chains.

The good news is that the reshaping of freight flows will not happen overnight: Most ports on the East Coast (with the exception of Norfolk) do not seem yet to be able to accommodate large ships or to have the same level of logistical infrastructure as the port of LA and firms may take some time to reconfigure their supply chains. This should give some time to the Port of LA to get prepared for this increased competition and enhance its service offering. Nevertheless, a major disruption, such as a strike, in the Port of LA leading could easily precipitate this course of action, so adopting a complacent attitude could have severe consequences.

Acknowledgments: I thank Manuel Herrerra for a very good discussion that led to the writing of this blog.

07/18/2016

Transparency is critical component in trust and technology can help build trust. For instance, police officers in the United States are beginning to wear body cameras so that they can record different incidents to improve the trust from the public and officer accountability. Besides the public sector, service businesses such as baby sitting, restaurant, delivery services, and even senior care home services can leverage technology to improve trust and even perceived service quality.

By using live cameras to show the cooking operations, researchers at Harvard Business School and University College London found that customers perceived the quality of the service is better[1]. This is exactly the strategy that the Michelin award winning dumpling restaurant Din Tai Fung has adopted: customers can see how the chefs prepare their meals through a glass kitchen. This works well when customers are present physically during the "production process" of the service. Will this work when customers are not present? You bet.

In the UK, customers can track the status of their pizza orders on their mobile phones. Better yet, the GPS technology has enabled customers in the US to track the real-time location of Pizza Hut's delivery person. In 2016, you can track the real-time location of your cable repairman who is on the way to your home just like your Uber driver. UPS is another company that may offer this service to improve the customer experience. But does it really matter if users can track the status and process of their service?

For these types of services, it is likely that the effect is mostly psychological because customers can easily verify the outcome. For example, it is easy to confirm if your pizza arrived on time or if your cable repairman came. However, transparency into the process really matters for other types of services where customers cannot easily verify the outcome. For example, consider senior care home service, customers cannot easily verify if the care provider took great care of their elderlies. Did the care provider feed my ailing mother on time? Did they give her the correct medicine and dosage on time? Did they take her for a walk through her favorite garden? This is where technology can help. With web cameras, GPS technology, and real-time, mobile updates, service providers can earn their customers' trust.

This is exactly how Wag! markets their dog walking services. By showing the photos of different dog walkers for the customers to choose from, by scheduling the exact time their dog to be walked, by showing the real-time map about the route taken by the their dog and the Wag! walker, pet owners have full transparency into the service (Figure below on the left). Better yet, Wag walkers even show you the “Report Card” of the walk, so owners can see how far and how long your dog walked and if they went to the bathroom (Figure below on the right). Who knows, perhaps the new virtual reality can even enable you to walk your dog virtually with the webcam!

Bottom line, engaging customers virtually using technology is a winning strategy in any service business!

06/22/2016

In the U.S., Feeding America is a national human services agency that distributes food donated by large food manufacturers (such as Kraft) to a nationwide network of food banks (Figure). At each food bank, 20% of the foods is provided by Feeding America and the remaining 80% is donated by the local food manufacturers and distributors. Because the quantity and the type of foods donated by the local communities are uncertain, Feeding America finds it difficult to allocate the right quantity and the right type of foods when they do not have access to timely information about the inventory level and the demand level of different food categories (e.g., pasta, cereals, meat, juice, snacks, dairy) at each food bank. Furthermore, certain food banks receive excessive supply of foods that they do not desire such as pickles. Consequently, there is an imbalance between the timely demand at each food bank and the allocated supply provided by Feeding America, which often leads to spoilage. So, how should Feeding America allocate its food supply to the food banks so that the supply can meet demand in a fair and timely manner?

To overcome this challenge, Feeding America set up a Task Force to find ways to reduce misallocations of food in 2005. The Task Force developed a “market” clearance mechanism (known as “The Choice System”) by offering “Shares” to each food bank on a periodical daily basis so that they can bid for the type and the quantity of food.[1] The Choice System is akin to the eBay platform: Feeding America “auctions” off its inventory of different types of foods on a daily basis. Upon reviewing what is available on the list and what is needed, each food bank uses its allocated shares to bid for different quantities of different items that they desire. By using a sealed-bid system, the highest bidder wins and receives the item and the number of shares of the winning bid will be subtracted from the winning bidder’s balance. Any items that “did not sell” on a given day will be carried over to the following day for more bidding. The following figure is a mock-up of the Choice System that may be seen by a regional food bank in Los Angeles. The system provides information about the current balance (9500 points) and the historical (winning bid) of different items (e.g., 5500 points for cereal) that is intended to help each food bank to determine its own bid to reveal its current need. The system allows each food bank to “borrow” shares so that it can win some items that it needs desperately. At the same time, the system allows each food bank to “earn” shares by bidding (negative points) for items that were not in high demand (e.g., pickles).

The Choice System was a great success. By 2010, over 200 million pounds of items were auctioned off. Also, the Choice System enables each food bank to reveal its true preference on a daily basis, which is reflected in the variability of the winning bids associated with different items in 2008 (Prendergast, 2015).

This information was helpful to Feeding America because it enabled them to inform the donors (manufacturers and distributors) about the relative preference of different types of items. By doing so, donors can donate the right type of items that can “sell” easily on the Choice System. In fact, the percentage of sales that involves negative bids (i.e., items that no food bank wants) has decreased from 10% in 2008 to 2% in 2011. Ultimately, the Choice System creates mutual benefits by making supply meet demand along the supply chain!

Reference

Prendergast, C., “The Allocation of Food to Food Banks,” working paper, Booth School of Business, University of Chicago, 2015.

[1] The number of shares given to each food bank is based on its size (i.e., aggregate demand, number of beneficiaries it serves, aggregate supply of foods donated by local communities).

05/31/2016

In February, 2016, India unveiled the world’s cheapest smartphone “Freedom 251” that sells for US$ 4! The Freedom 215 phone comes with a 4-inch display and a 3.2 megapixel front camera. It runs on Android 5.1 operating system with preloaded apps such as Women Safety, WhatsApp, Facebook, Twitter, etc. The manufacturer of this phone (Ringing Bells Pvt Ltd) is receiving pre-orders and the actual delivery is supposed to be begin by June 30, 2016. Not only are the Indians excited about this phone, Prime Minister Modi embraces this phone because it supports his “Made in India” and “Digital India” initiatives. Also, it was reported that the Indian government provided “strong support” for the development of Freedom 251.

Unfortunately, this “made in India” cheapest smartphone turned out to be a distant dream. It was found that the “prototype” of Freedom 251 was actually an existing model Ikon 4 imported by Adcom (an Indian company that imports tablets and mobile phones) and the same model (Adcom Ikon 4) was available for sale on multiple e-commerce websites including Gadgets360, Amazon, Snapdeal and Shopclues in India already for approximately US$ 60 (Dixit, 2016). To calm public concern, Ringing Bell promised to refund the first phase's 30,000 customers, and Adcom has issued a statement to dissociate itself from the company.

To truly develop an affordable “made in India” smartphone for the huge Indian market[1], one needs to understand the cost component associated with each step along the supply chain. Relative to China, India has one key advantage: cheaper labor cost. However, this advantage alone cannot tip the balance in favor of “made in India”. To make this dream come true, India government needs to develop short-term and long-term solution to improve economic development in India.

Current, India is not equipped to develop cheaper and better components for smartphones. As such, importing components to India for the assembly operations appear to be sensible. Therefore, in the short term, the Indian government should develop incentives for contract manufacturers to set up factories in India. It is gratifying to note that the government has set this in motion. In 2015, Foxconn announced that it plans to invest US$5 billion to set up factories in India, and Lenovo announced that it is setting up a factory in Chennai. However, to lower the total cost of producing a smartphone, cheap labor cost in India can help, but lowering the import tariff for importing components is critical. As of 2014, tariffs for imported components to India have been be as high as 28%, while topping out at around 12% for finished products!

Once India can reduce the production cost of a smartphone, India government should find ways to improve the education system to develop more scientists and engineers so that India has develop better and cheaper and better components for smartphones and develop various Apps and other information services for smartphones in the long term. Also, the Indian government should improve its retail sector using online and offline selling formats.

Prime Minister Modi’s “Made in India” is a great aspiration. From aspiration to reality, there is a need to develop a coordinated plan for the entire ecosystem to thrive!

04/11/2016

Many enthusiasts love drone photography and Amazon is developing drone delivery service. At the same time, some startups are combining toy drones with special sensors and cameras and smartphones to create innovative business services in agriculture.

In France, Delair-Tech, a 50-staff startup based in Toulouse is researching a drone to enable farmers to monitor crops for diseases, assess yield and identity where fertilizer is needed. This service is based on a subscription, and the Economist reported that it plans to charge 15 Euros per hectare.

In Chile, researchers are developing drones with special cameras that can allow farmers to monitor the condition of their crops from their smartphones. By analyzing the data captured by camera using spectral analysis, farmers can monitor moisture content, ground water, plant health, and pest infestation as well as growth rate of the plant. (See Figure.) This way, farmers can localize water and pest control, saving water and improving yield.

Besides farmers, animals can benefit from drones as well. Across Africa and Asia, an illegal trade worth $7 to $10 billion annually is threatening the survivals of elephants, rhinoceros, tigers, etc. Due to vast space, there is no effective way for conservation groups and governments to police the poachers and protect the animals. However, drones can help: they can collect and send data to law-enforcement units, who can then intervene if poachers are threatening animals. (See Figure.) Google just offered $5 million to support World Wildlife Fund to expand its conservation-drone program in Africa and Asia. Hopefully, these flying drones can be the guardian angels protecting these animals from harm’s way.

03/21/2016

Wall Street Journal reported that the 2015 holiday shopping season was a winner: E-commerce sales rose 20% year over year and total sales rose 7.9% (Ng and Stevens, 2015). However, approximately 25% of e-commerce sales are expected to be returned due to many reasons: unwanted gifts, after purchase regrets (wrong size / color), etc. To woo consumers to feel at ease to purchase online, many online retailers such as Amazon offer risk-free returns.

Most online retailers are not equipped to handle returns. Instead, returned goods are collected, sorted and resold by logistics companies (e.g., Optoro, Genco (a FedEx Corp. business) or B-Stock Solutions) and resold to liquidators such as Shorewood Liquidators at approximately 10-20 cents on the dollar. If 25% of items are returned and sold at 15 cents on the dollar, online retailers incurred a huge loss on those items they thought they sold.

What can online retailers to do reduce the Boomerang effect of these online sales returns?

First, develop virtual try on technology. To reduce returns due to after purchase regrets (wrong size / color), online retailers can develop virtual try on apps. For example, besides the 2-D virtual try on glasses developed by Warby Parker, Glasses.com developed award-winning 3D virtual try-on technology that enable shoppers to see how different frames will actually look on their faces. For apparel items, startup companies such as Embodee developed a 3-D virtual try-on technology by using measurements from shoppers input or from a 3D camera or scanner. This technology enables the shoppers to see how garments look and fit using color-coded “comfort maps” to pinpoint where garments will be tight or loose.

Second, to reduce returns due to unwanted gifts, encourage shoppers to develop an online gift registry that can be shared with friends. Also, create a platform that allows for “crowd gifting” so that multiple friends can share the cost of a more expensive gift. The logic is simple: no one would like to send a gift to a friend that is not wanted unless everyone is really into white elephant gift exchange parties.

Third, develop “before sales” customer service, not just focus on aftersales customer service. Zappos pioneered the customer service “consultants” who talk with potential customers like friends and helped them to select the shoes they want (and love). By doing so, it helped Zappos to boost sales and reduce returns.

To reduce returns, online retailers should develop “before sales” services instead of focusing on “after sales” services. To avoid the boomerang hits you on its return, throw it carefully!

02/22/2016

In August 2015, Uber became the most valued startup company in the world with a valuation of $51 billion. At the same time, Uber threatened taxi services in the United States and Europe, which triggered various protests in France, Germany and elsewhere. Despite various disputes between Uber and various groups (local governments, taxi drivers, etc.), Uber is using a disruptive business model to challenge taxi monopolies in many countries.

While Uber is embraced by many folks in the West, its business model may not work in China especially after two ride-hailing Chinse companies merged to form Didi-Kuadi (DK) (http://www.xiaojukeji.com/website/index.html). On the surface, both Uber and DK are similar. First, both companies rely on mobile technology to connect passengers with drivers. Second, both Uber and DK are aiming for the huge market in China with 800 million urban people with transportation needs. Third, both companies have strong financial backing in China: Uber has strong backing from Baidu, and DK has a valuation of $15 billion with strong financial backing from Alibaba and Tencent. Can Uber succeed in China?

Upon further examination, there are some fundamental differences that give DK a competitive advantage that Uber will find it difficult to beat unless it changes its business model in China. Here is why.

DK Combines Cooperation and Competition. While Uber aims to disrupt the taxi industry, DK cooperates with the taxi drivers by offering its mobile apps so that taxi drivers can use these apps as an additional channel to get more passengers. At the same time, DK competes with taxi drivers by recruiting drivers to earn extra cash by using their own cars to give rides to passengers especially during peak hours. By cooperating with the taxi drivers, DK can gain two competitive advantages: (a) DK can acquire a much larger pool of drivers. In 2015, DK has over 1 million private-car drivers, compared to Uber’s 100,000 drivers. (b) DK can scale up its operations much faster. In 2015, DK offered services in 80 cities, compared to Uber’s 16. Consequently, it should not come as a surprise when Re/Code reported that, in July 2015, DK was giving 3 million rides a day in China, compared to Uber’s 1 million. Also, according to the statistics reported by Caixin, DK enjoyed 80% market share, compare to Uber’s 11.5% (see figure below).

DK Meets Local Needs In China. DK offers a wide range of services to meet the needs of many urban middle-class workers. According to the statistics reported by Caixin, DK captures the growing middle-class professionals in China (see figure below). First, to travel between home and office, many Chinese white collar professionals would need to take different types of overcrowded public transportations. Because of the inconvenience, they either drive their own cars which can be expensive. DK offers a new service called “Hitch” that enables these drivers to earn extra cash by giving rides to other workers who share the same route. Second, heavy drinking after work is rather common in China. To reduce drunk driving, DK offers a new service called “chauffeur service” that enables a customer to hire a chauffeur to pick him up and then drive him home in his own car. Third, to provide the convenience of a large group of people to attend social events or business meetings in China, DK offers “bus” services by enable tour bus drivers to earn extra income.

To retain good drivers, both Uber and DK are offering bonuses to those who completed a high number of rides. At the same time, both companies are competing for new drivers to keep the rider’s waiting time low. This competition will continue. At the same time, DK may be in discussion with Alibaba about the idea of using their drivers to make home deliveries for its Tmall online customers. Ultimately, DK’s business model in China is more comprehensive, and Uber will find it difficult to beat!

02/01/2016

In late June of 2015, the Senate passed legislation that gave President Obama the authority to present the 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade package to Congress with no amendments or filibusters allowed. TPP is a unprecedented trade deal in history because it involves 12 countries (United States, Japan, Australia, Peru, Malaysia, Vietnam, New Zealand, Chile, Singapore, Canada, Mexico, and Brunei Darussalam), which accounts for 40% of global trade. (The global trade amounts to US$ 38 trillion in 2014, where China took the lead with US$ 4.2 trillion and US was second with US$ 3.9 trillion.)

TPP creates advantages for its members to trade among each other, stimulating economic growth for its member countries with a combined population of 806 million (11% of the global population). On the flip side, many critics worry that TPP will create negative economic impact on many developing countries (e.g., Bangladesh, Cambodia, Ecuador, Guatemala, Indonesia, India, Pakistan, and many African countries). Is this concern valid?

Based on our evaluation, the impact of TPP on developing countries is not as bad as portrayed in the press. For instance, six of the ASEAN countries such as Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, Philippines, and Thailand can leverage their FTAs with the remaining 4 ASEAN countries (Brunei, Malaysia, Singapore, and Vietnam) who are TPP members to develop cost effective supply chain operations to facilitate multi-lateral trades with minimal tariffs. Specifically, those 6 ASEAN countries can focus on “upstream” operations, and ship the components or semi-finished goods to the remaining 4 countries via FTAs to conduct the downstream operations before the finished goods are shipped to the other TPP members via TPP agreement.

Overall, TPP is not a threat to various developing countries. Instead, it can create new opportunities for more free trade agreements to stimulate trades among different countries. Hopefully, all trades will become free one day, free at last!

01/04/2016

Over 500 million people in developing countries can restore their vision with a pair of simple reading glass and yet they have no access to affordable reading glasses. This challenge has motivated Jordan Kassalow and Scott Berrie to co-found Vision Spring (www.visionspring.org) in 2001 with a clear goal: to produce, distribute, and sell affordable glasses for the poor workers in developing countries.

Producing cheap glasses was the easy part, but distributing them turned out to be difficult. By limiting the reading glasses to three different strengths and by outsourcing the production to China, Vision Spring managed to produce reading glasses at around $2 per pair. However, because distribution channels are non-existent in the rural areas of many developing countries, Vision Spring explored different ideas to distribute their glasses in different phases.

During the exploration phase, Vision Spring started with the “micro-franchise” model under which micro-entrepreneurs (known as Vision Entrepreneurs) receive a 3-day training program and a sales kit that contains reading glasses of different strengths and the eye-examination charts. Initially, the kit was “sold” to the micro-entrepreneurs through micro-financing so that Vision Spring is essentially running a micro-franchise model. After experiencing difficulties in attracting micro-entrepreneurs to take up loans for the kits and in managing these loans, Vision Spring changed the model to a “micro-consignment” model under which Vision Spring “lends” the kit with 20 pairs of glasses to the micro-entrepreneurs. By setting the wholesale price at $3 and retail price at $4, each micro-entrepreneur earns $1 for selling a pair of reading glasses without incurring any upfront investment.

While the micro-consignment model gains some traction, the growth was limited because micro-entrepreneurs cannot earn much by selling reading glasses only especially when they often travel on-foot which makes it difficult for them to sell in different villages (Figure above). To increase their earnings without the need to travel extensively on foot, Vision Spring developed a “referral program” so that these micro-entrepreneurs can earn extra by referring customers to designated Vision Spring optical shops in El Salvador that sell prescription glasses.

To scale up the distribution and retail operations, Vision Spring developed a franchise model by partnering with other organizations such as microfinance institutions and community health organizations such as BRAC. The partnership with BRAC enabled Vision Spring to piggy back on BRAC’s network of community health volunteers who sell basic health and hygiene products in villages for many years. This partnership is scaling up rapidly: BRAC is targeting to sell over 13 million pairs of Vision Spring glasses within the next 10 years.

When the social business is proven to be sustainable and scalable, the funding for scaling up the operations would be easier to come by. Vision Spring has received funding from a number of foundations such as Skoll Foundation and The Lonely Planet Foundation. In 2013 alone, Vision Spring sold over 380,000 pairs of glasses in developing countries. When the poor can see, they can work. The economic impact of Vision Spring will continue to grow!

12/07/2015

The ReUse People[1] is a non-profit organization dedicated to keeping building materials out of landfill. It does so (among others) by deconstructing buildings step-by-step, rather than demolishing them, and selling the salvaged materials through their warehouses. Ted Reiff, the President of The ReUse People, once commented to me that there is no contractor in the world who likes to throw stuff away, and that for any item that might appear to be waste on one construction site, there is always someone somewhere else who can use it. The challenge is to effectively match the demand with the supply.

That same principle underlies the emergence of waste exchanges for other kinds of waste. “Reuse” is the middle option in the “reduce, reuse, recycle” hierarchy, but, just as in construction, one person’s waste can be someone else’s resource. The challenge, again, is matching the existing (but often latent) demand with the available supply. The emergence of online waste exchanges creates intriguing opportunities to study what factors contribute to the likelihood of being able to match a “buyer” and “seller” (with quotes, as often these excess materials are available for free to anybody who is willing to pick them up).

The concept of an online waste exchange is simple enough: encourage people with materials they no longer have a use for to post them on the exchange rather than send them straight to landfill or recycling, and hope that someone will see the listing and take the materials off their hands, for free or for a price. The practice is not quite so simple: sellers may not be aware of the opportunity or not think it’s worthwhile to put together the listing, while buyers may be unsure about who they’re dealing with or what they’re getting. What makes an exchange more likely to happen?

An interesting paper by Suvrat Dhanorkar, Karen Donohue and Kevin Linderman[2] examines that question, by looking at transactions through the Minnesota exchange, MNExchange.Org, which has been in operation since 1999 and today has thousands of registered users (buyers and sellers). Quoting the authors’ description of the exchange: “At any given time, the online exchange may host hundreds of listings by different waste categories. [...] When a user submits a listing, the exchange displays item-specific information such as the quoted price, product description, frequency (whether one-time or recurring) and location (by county and zip code). For example, a construction company (seller) might list its surplus stormwater concrete pipes [...] on MNExchange.Org with accompanying product and transaction information. This information allows potential buyers to browse the listings and sort on specific criteria. Interested registered buyer(s) can then contact the seller directly (through seller-provided contact details) to get more information about the product, price, logistics etc. before negotiating an exchange. The terms of exchange are mutually decided offline by the transacting parties.”

Even though the exchange itself is online, buyers and sellers who are further apart geographically are less likely to conduct a transaction. This is a useful reminder that even seemingly online marketplaces are still tied to an underlying geography. The ReUse People finds the same thing (although not online): there’s a demand for everything they salvage from a building, the challenge is getting it from where it’s salvaged to where it’s wanted.

Dhanorkar and colleagues also find that past familiarity does help: buyers and sellers who are more familiar with each other are more likely to conduct an exchange. This is another useful reminder that online markets, though they may help connect far more buyers and sellers than before, are not entirely impersonal match-makers but still contain a human element.

In short, online marketplaces have real promise when it comes to finding a new welcoming home for one person’s waste, but we should not fall into the trap of forgetting that while the marketplace may be online, the underlying transaction is still every bit as physical as ever.

[1] Disclosure: I am a member of the Advisory Board of The ReUse People.

[2] “Repurposing Materials & Waste through Online Exchanges: Overcoming the Last Hurdle”, forthcoming in Production and Operations Management.